GU withdraws controversial ads

17 May 201906:09am IST

17 May 201906:09am IST

Report byTeam Herald

Backs off on relaxation of mandatory condition of 15 years domicile period for appointment to varsity

PANJIM: In a major victory to Goa Forward Party (GFP), Goa University has withdrawn its controversial advertisement for filling up 80-odd vacancies, wherein it had relaxed the mandatory condition of 15 years domicile period.

GFP, led by its president and Deputy Chief Minister Vijai Sardesai, was the only political party to take up the issue citing that by dropping this clause injustice had been done to Goans, who are eligible for the posts.

In a statement, Goa University’s Registrar said, “The Goa University has withdrawn the three advertisements released on 8th March 2019 for recruitment of teaching positions viz. 1. For Backlog vacancies, 2. For Shortfall Vacancies 3. For Regular vacancies.”

Goa Youth Forward had taken up the issue after it was noticed in the advertisement that the domicile clause had been withdrawn. The youth wing delegation had met Registrar V Y Reddy on May 3 demanding that the advertisement be withdrawn. They said that the act of Goa University was basically to promote non-Goans while depriving deserving Goan youth the job.

The issue was later taken by Sardesai, who in a letter to Chief Minister Dr Pramod Sawant said this is ploy to deny Goans their right by not implementing the domicile requirement.

Seeking the CM’s intervention, Sardesai had said that the University authorities do not have any right to bypass the university statute without any relaxation granted by the government. He also found himself embroiled in controversy in the matter over his comment to “weaponise” youth if the government fails to act.

Sawant had accordingly sought a report from the Registrar over entire issue. Goa Governor and Chancellor GU Dr Mridula Sinha too intervened in the matter after a delegation of GFP youth members called upon her seeking action.

The attempts were also seen to put Goan OBC and ST candidates to injustice through manipulation of the recruitment roster. The University had maintained silence over the entire issue, while it was learnt that it had not sought government permission while relaxing the domicile clause.